The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Error 1) The Defendant: (a) notified D, an agent of C, of the fact that the said vehicle was mortgaged at the time of selling the Ecoos vehicle owned by the Defendant; (b) thereafter, when it was difficult to cancel the mortgage, the Defendant returned the purchase price paid to D and the victim C; and (c) on January 30, 201, the Defendant did not deceiving D and the victim C; (d) on January 30, 201, the Defendant: (a) on the part of the victim H, the owner of the Ocs vehicle requested the sale of the vehicle; (b) received KRW 5 million from the victim H who was in the same business relationship; (c) thereafter, the said owner returned the said money to H by cancelling the request for sale; and (d) did not deceiving the victim H.

3) On February 1, 201, the Defendant: (a) committed fraud against the victim H on February 1, 201, on the condition that the Defendant was liable for the existing installment payment of KRW 30 million with respect to AB-owned vehicles; (b) sought to settle the said vehicle price of KRW 27 million with respect to the said vehicles received from the victim H who was in the same business relationship at the time; (c) paid the previous installment of the said money, and thereafter returned the remainder of KRW 15 million as the said vehicle was not sold, to the victim H; and (d) did not deceiving the victim H; (d) the Defendant sold the vehicle of KRW 20 million with the leased vehicle, while receiving the remainder of the lease amount of KRW 20 million with the purchase price, the Defendant did not induce the victim K.

5 The Defendant, as above, requested the victim K to sell a hyd vehicle owned by him in the course of selling hyd vehicle to the victim K. Accordingly, the Defendant sold the above hyd vehicle to the victimO. Since K cancelled the request for sale and subsequently returned the purchase price to theO, K did not deceiving the victimO.